Match referee reveals the truth of Monkeygate: 'What happened was a racist remark'

Ten years after the infamous ‘Monkeygate’ scandal blew up during India’s Test tour of Australia, match referee Mike Procter has opened up about the incident, saying, “Unfortunately Harbhajan in this case was guilty”.

The summer of international cricket is winding down, with the T20 tri-series the only event left on the Aussie calendar – a series where bookmakers Neds rate Australia and New Zealand as equal $2.75 favourites, with Neds rating England $2.85 to emerge victorious – however, Procter is just starting up the promotion of his autobiography, Caught in the Middle.

In the book, the 71-year-old gives his version of the events in which the Aussies accused Harbhajan Singh of racially abusing Andrew Symonds, calling him a “monkey”.

The Indian team said that Harbhajan had actually said ““maa ki” – an insult in Hindi – to Symonds.

“Beyond a reasonable doubt is the terminology used, and it was beyond reasonable doubt that unfortunately Harbhajan in this case was guilty. And I’m not calling him a racist, I’m just saying that in this case, what happened was a racist remark.”

Further muddying the issue was that Harbhajan effectively stayed silent throughout the hearing.

“The unfortunate thing that I found with Harbhajan was that he said he did not speak English and did not understand English,” Procter said.

“So Nigel Peters, the Queen’s counsel, said that we can get an interpreter for him if that’s the case. And he didn’t want an interpreter. So he didn’t want to say anything at that hearing, which was very difficult.”

As a result, Procter found Harbhajan guilty and banned him for three matches – however, it was far from the end of the issue, as India threatened to abandon the tour in protest.

Then, at an appeal into the hearing, Sachin Tendulkar changed his testimony.

“Sachin Tendulkar being the man he is, tried to appease the situation, tried to calm things down,” Procter said.

“But then at the appeal, he suddenly said he heard what was said (between Harbhajan and Symonds) – which he didn’t say at my initial hearing. That was very unfortunate, because that could have led to a different outcome completely...

“I had my hearing at which he had the chance to say something. He had the chance to say what he saw of the situation as it happened out there. And in my hearing he said that he didn’t hear anything. He tried to appease the situation.

“And then my hearing is over, I give my verdict and there’s an appeal process which went before a judge from New Zealand. And apparently he said at that hearing that he heard what Harbhajan Singh said, which was a very bad Indian word.

“It was very unfortunate that he didn’t say that at my hearing. The stories were that if the appeal wasn’t upheld, that the Indians would go back home. That was the situation.”

This content brought to you by Neds, odds correct at time of publication